← All Phrases

“seized material”

Search & SeizureSection 153ASection 153A12,214 judgments

The decision most relied on for seized material is CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears (362 ITR 673), cited in 528 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on seized material

CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears
362 ITR 673 · 2014 · Supreme Court
528
citing judgments

The recording of a satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer is a jurisdictional prerequisite for assessments under Section 153C, and the six-year limitation period for such assessments is reckoned from the date this satisfaction is recorded.

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
163 Taxmann.com 118 · 2024 · Supreme Court
500
citing judgments

Strict adherence to approval protocols under Section 153D, including those in the Departmental Manual of Office Procedure, is essential for search assessments. An assessment is invalid if the approving authority fails to apply its mind or consider all relevant seized material before granting approval.

ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
394 ITR 569 · 2017 · High Court
282
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and specifically relate to the assessment years for which assessments are reopened. A document relevant only for one year cannot be used to reopen other assessment years without being incriminating for those years.

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta
322 ITR 396 · 2010 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Proceedings become fatal if principles of natural justice are violated, such as when seized material is not provided to the assessee or cross-examination of a person whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon is denied.

Mumbai), DCIT v. Vipin Aggarwal
82 ITD 85 · 2002 · ITAT
237
citing judgments

Evidence corroborating entries of payments or loan/interest advancements found in seized material from a third party must specifically show the actual transfer of money from the third party to the recipient to be admissible.

CIT v. Jasjit Singh
155 Taxmann.com 155 · 2023 · Supreme Court
235
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C concerning a non-searched person, the relevant date for calculating the block of assessment years is the date on which the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of that person assumes possession of the seized material, not the date of the original search. This date determines the look-back period for reopening assessments under Section 153A read with 153C.

Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer
161 Taxmann.com 485 · 2024 · High Court
196
citing judgments

Recording satisfaction under Section 153C for initiating proceedings against a third person is not a mechanical exercise; it requires a finding that seized material has a direct bearing on the third person's income, and improper satisfaction vitiates the assessment. Abatement under the second proviso to Section 153A is an inevitable consequence of a search, irrespective of the Assessing Officer's opinion on the material's impact.

PCIT v. Anuj Bansal
165 Taxmann.com 2 · 2024 · High Court
181
citing judgments

An approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is considered mechanical and invalid if granted without application of mind and without perusing relevant assessment records, including seized material. This principle has been affirmed by multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court.

Judgments citing seized material

The DCIT Central-(1), Indore vs. M/S Ayush Ajay Construction Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 740/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyanii.T(Ss).A. Nos.14 To 16/Ind/2018 (Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jain, & Smt. Shreya JasinFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

made adhoc disallowance while completing assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act which are not based on any, of the seized material found during the course of search. We are of the considered view that while making the assessment pursuant to search taken place and that

DCIT Cir 4(2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gemini Engi Fab Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1457/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rutuja Pawar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Kardam, D.R
Section 144Section 153ASection 153C

assessee company through its advocate issued a notice by returning the cash commission paid for the IPO etc. On the basis of aforesaid seized material and information proceedings under section 153C of the Act were initiated. The AO, after declining the contentions made by the assessee, made an addition ... search so as to doubt the transactions. It was noted that in the entire assessment order, the AO has not referred to any seized material or other material for the year under consideration having being found during the course of search in the case of assessee, leave alone the question

A.Tirupathi Rayudu(HUF), Visakhapatnam vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 96/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

time of search and seizure in para 5.5 of the order and quoted the reference to the Annexure/A/ATR/PO/Res/1. 7 Based on the seized material the Ld. AO then proceeded to further verify the creditworthiness, identity of the lenders. These evidences were not produced before the Ld. AO and therefore

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Atr Warehousing Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 106/VIZ/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 104, 105 & 106/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Atr Ware Housing (P) Central Circle-2, Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aadca 2121 Q

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which was also not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that some of the additions made ... back to back cash receipt for the payment of interest made through banking channels. The fact brought out by the Ld. AR that the seized material wherein the details of the names of the lenders and the amounts borrowed by the assessee and its group companies was before

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Atr Warehousing Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 105/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 104, 105 & 106/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Atr Ware Housing (P) Central Circle-2, Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aadca 2121 Q

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which was also not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that some of the additions made ... back to back cash receipt for the payment of interest made through banking channels. The fact brought out by the Ld. AR that the seized material wherein the details of the names of the lenders and the amounts borrowed by the assessee and its group companies was before

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Atr Warehousing Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 104/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 104, 105 & 106/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Atr Ware Housing (P) Central Circle-2, Ltd., Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aadca 2121 Q

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which was also not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that some of the additions made ... back to back cash receipt for the payment of interest made through banking channels. The fact brought out by the Ld. AR that the seized material wherein the details of the names of the lenders and the amounts borrowed by the assessee and its group companies was before

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Atr Warehousing Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

grounds of appeal on these issues. 12. On the issue of additions made by the Ld. AO, not on the basis of the seized material, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search and seizure action 132 of Act, the Ld. CIT(A) held that since ... assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which is not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the additions made

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Atr Warehousing Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 102/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

grounds of appeal on these issues. 12. On the issue of additions made by the Ld. AO, not on the basis of the seized material, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search and seizure action 132 of Act, the Ld. CIT(A) held that since ... assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which is not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the additions made

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Anumolu Avnash, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 101/VIZ/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

account, confirmation letters in respect of unsecured loans taken from the persons as per the pages 140 and 141 of the seized material marked as Annexure/A/ATR/PO/Res/1 etc. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO enquired as to why the sum Rs. 1,69,00,000/- appearing as “sundry creditors” should ... have routed their own cash through various companies and has brought in the same through fictitious lenders. A careful and detailed analysis of the seized materials has not shown that the assessee group has paid cash to the extent of the loans received. In fact the seized materials themselves demonstrate

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam vs. Anumolu Tirupati Rayudu(HUF), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

grounds of appeal on these issues. 12. On the issue of additions made by the Ld. AO, not on the basis of the seized material, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search and seizure action 132 of Act, the Ld. CIT(A) held that since ... assessment proceedings and the examination of the accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the additions are not based on seized material which is not denied by the Ld. AO in his remand report. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the additions made

Late at Rayudu Individual Representative by Avinash, Visakhapatnam vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals-3, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 614/VIZ/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

time of search and seizure in para 5.5 of the order and quoted the reference to the Annexure/A/ATR/PO/Res/1. 7 Based on the seized material the Ld. AO then proceeded to further verify the creditworthiness, identity of the lenders. These evidences were not produced before the Ld. AO and therefore

Late at Rayudu Individual Representative by Avinash, Visakhapatnam vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals-3, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 613/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 68

time of search and seizure in para 5.5 of the order and quoted the reference to the Annexure/A/ATR/PO/Res/1. 7 Based on the seized material the Ld. AO then proceeded to further verify the creditworthiness, identity of the lenders. These evidences were not produced before the Ld. AO and therefore

M/S. Pushkar Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2214/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2213-2214/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 M/S. Pushkar Corporation, D.C.I.T., 27, Nakshatra Arcade, Vs. Central Circle-1(4), Ioc Road, Ahmedabad. Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. C/O. M.S. Chhajed & Co. “Kamal Shanti” Besides Bank Of Baroda, Nr. Sardar Patel Under Bridge, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aalep1840Q & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2345-2346/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., M/S. Pushkar Corporation, Central Circle-1(4), Vs. 27, Nakshatra Arcade, Ahmedabad. Ioc Road, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. C/O. M.S. Chhajed & Co. “Kamal Shanti” Besides Bank Of Baroda, Nr. Sardar Patel Under Bridge, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aalep1840Q

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT.D.R with Shri V.K. Mangla, JCIT, D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40ASection 69C

arise. Likewise, there was the information received from the DIT office about the land transaction dealings carried out by the assessee without the seized materials. In the absence of seized materials, there was no possibility of recording the satisfaction as required under the provisions of section 153C ... paper written is in his handwriting but other half in someone else’s handwriting seems to be illogical and cannot be accepted. Further, the seized material needs to be read as whole and not partially to suits one’s advantages. Therefore, the documents found from the premises of the partner

M/S. Pushkar Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2213/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2213-2214/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 M/S. Pushkar Corporation, D.C.I.T., 27, Nakshatra Arcade, Vs. Central Circle-1(4), Ioc Road, Ahmedabad. Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. C/O. M.S. Chhajed & Co. “Kamal Shanti” Besides Bank Of Baroda, Nr. Sardar Patel Under Bridge, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aalep1840Q & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2345-2346/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., M/S. Pushkar Corporation, Central Circle-1(4), Vs. 27, Nakshatra Arcade, Ahmedabad. Ioc Road, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. C/O. M.S. Chhajed & Co. “Kamal Shanti” Besides Bank Of Baroda, Nr. Sardar Patel Under Bridge, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aalep1840Q

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT.D.R with Shri V.K. Mangla, JCIT, D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40ASection 69C

arise. Likewise, there was the information received from the DIT office about the land transaction dealings carried out by the assessee without the seized materials. In the absence of seized materials, there was no possibility of recording the satisfaction as required under the provisions of section 153C ... paper written is in his handwriting but other half in someone else’s handwriting seems to be illogical and cannot be accepted. Further, the seized material needs to be read as whole and not partially to suits one’s advantages. Therefore, the documents found from the premises of the partner

Hotel Vysali and Mayoori Bar, Thodupuzha vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Kochi

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 467/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Vysali & Mayoori Bar, Vs. Dcit, Fish Market Road, Central Circle – 2, Thodupuzha, Idukki, Kochi. Kerala – 685 584. Pan : Aabfh 3483 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. T. M. Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148

search, a document with the heading “DEMO VYS” with details of assets, capital and liabilities was seized. The AO noticed that as per this seized material the net profit of the assessee for the year under consideration was seen to be Rs.1,14,72,883 and based on the same ... assessee and therefore concluded that the assessee has declared a net profit of Rs.10,49,522/- as against the profit in the seized material to be of Rs.1,14,72,883/-. The AO accordingly considered the same to be the income of the assessee while concluding assessment under section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jinesh Ashwinkumar Matalia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 1324/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shailesh ParmarFor Respondent: Hemantkumar Chimanlal
Section 132Section 153CSection 69C

result of search. 8.3.2 On perusal of the impugned assessment order it is evident that the Ld. AO has not referred to any seized material found during the course of search or any other evidence gathered during the course of search in the case of Bhattad Group to make this ... 10/09/2018 It is apparent from perusal of first proviso to section 153C(1) of the Act that the 'date of handing over of seized material has to be taken as 'date of initiation of search' for the purpose of determination of the years of abatement of assessment proceedings as provided

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 3(3)(1)., Mumbai vs. M/S Jinesh Ashwingkumar Matalia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 1321/MUM/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shailesh ParmarFor Respondent: Hemantkumar Chimanlal
Section 132Section 153CSection 69C

result of search. 8.3.2 On perusal of the impugned assessment order it is evident that the Ld. AO has not referred to any seized material found during the course of search or any other evidence gathered during the course of search in the case of Bhattad Group to make this ... 10/09/2018 It is apparent from perusal of first proviso to section 153C(1) of the Act that the 'date of handing over of seized material has to be taken as 'date of initiation of search' for the purpose of determination of the years of abatement of assessment proceedings as provided

I.B.Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dcita Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2029/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(2)Section 68

next issue contested by the assessee relates to the addition of Rs.29.34 lakhs on account of alleged unexplained expenditure on the basis of seized material. We notice that the assessee did not properly co-operate before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Further, the assessee has stated before

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore vs. Mr. Shorff Krishnarajasetty Satheesha, Kodagu

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 997/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

erred in not appreciating the fact that the proceedings u/s.153C of the Act in the assessee's case is valid as the seized material are co-related to each other and in fact a continuity of one another in sequence. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that ... erred in not appreciating the fact that mere non-appearance of the assessee's name on a particular page or sheet of the seized material does not amount to the material being irrelevant and not pertaining to the assessee. For these and such other grounds that may be urged

ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi vs. Kad Housing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the captioned appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3305/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

incriminating material was found or seized in course of search action on the appellant. The AO has not pointed out any specific incriminating seized material relating to transactions of the appellant leading to addition of Rs.2,26,62,100/- made in the assessment order u/s. 153A r.w.s ... related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously an assessment has to be made under this Section only on the basis of seized material."(emphasis supplied) v. In absence